The last paragraph of my OP you quoted wasn't so much the conclusion of it as much as the logical next step in exploring the phenomenon. I started the thread off with the "more guns = less gun violence" point because that is what a lot of 2A enthusiasts seem to believe based on their arguments, but under scrutiny seems impossible to uphold. Still, if someone actually does believe this then the argument I made up doesn't apply to them, it's just that based off of the apparent absurdity of this position I am awfully skeptical that this is really what most 2A enthusiasts believe deep down.
That's when I pivoted towards the "bad guy with a gun" point. In my experiences arguing with and observing 2A enthusiasts, this seems much more prevalent and more coherent to explain how most see this issue. Personal responsibility is a theme among conservatives, that's basically where this seems to be coming from. It certainly offers a coherent worldview where one can assert that communities suffering from gun violence warrant minimal consideration without being flat out indifferent to human life.
So to address your points directly;
Yes to #1. Chicago as an example is the political right's poster child for talking about gun violence. You'd be hard pressed to convince me that people (who are overwhelmingly white) using this as their example of a liberal gun hell hole don't know that most of the people in the affected areas there are black.
Mostly yes to #2 but I believe that there's a lot of cognitive dissonance there, which is where the "more guns = less gun violence" point comes in.
To # 3 Yes, that's the conclusion. But it's not a direct thought as you describe. I'm not saying that these people think to themselves "well I hate black people so I don't care of they're dying", im saying they are more apathetic to the loss of life because they view it more as a social problem for those communities to figure out. In other words, their explanation for why the violence is so bad in these areas is primarily because of the people there, not because of the conditions in which the people in those areas have been subjected to, the prevalence of guns to which they have contributed being part of that.